REBOR 1:35 Utahraptor ostrommaysorum Museum Class Replica “Wind Hunter” [updated]

[Arul]

We know exactly how Yutyrannus should look like and how Utahraptor should be feathered, we're absolutely agree with the diagram provided by tyrantqueen, however as a company we also need to consider the public acceptance of these dinosaur replicas, therefore please consider the inaccuracy was the result of artistic embellishments.

Agreed my brother said so when he teach me how to sculp for the first time...

[Pachyrhinosaurus]

We know exactly how Yutyrannus should look like and how Utahraptor should be feathered, we're absolutely agree with the diagram provided by tyrantqueen, however as a company we also need to consider the public acceptance of these dinosaur replicas, therefore please consider the inaccuracy was the result of artistic embellishments.

This reminds me of the visible fenestrae on many of our (mostly theropod) figures. Adding the fenestrae gives an illusion of more detail and therefore a more lifelike animal, however the skull shouldn't be shrink wrapped with skin. Judging by the pictures, I don't think the Utahraptor has this problem

[suspsy]

We know exactly how Yutyrannus should look like and how Utahraptor should be feathered, we're absolutely agree with the diagram provided by tyrantqueen, however as a company we also need to consider the public acceptance of these dinosaur replicas, therefore please consider the inaccuracy was the result of artistic embellishments.

If you don't believe that the public will accept a fully feathered dinosaur, then why select Yutyrannus for one of your products? Why not Allosaurus or Gorgosaurus instead? As it stands, this is really no different from a model of Archaeopteryx without any feathers on its limbs and tail.

A great way to increase public acceptance of feathered dinosaurs is for more companies to produce such models. Battat, CollectA, Safari, and other companies have gone this route and it only seems to have made them more popular with collectors.

[tyrantqueen]

however as a company we also need to consider the public acceptance of these dinosaur replicas

That's sad to hear. The general public have a pretty dismal conception of what is a dinosaur is, to be honest.

Ask an elementary school student to draw a T. rex, and they will probably depict the tyrant with a sloping back and drooping tail. College students are even more likely to make the same error. That's what paleontologists Robert Ross, Don Duggan-Haas, and Warren Allmon found when they asked students to do just that in an effort to see how public perception of dinosaurs matches up with scientific understanding. Despite museum displays, carefully illustrated works of paleo art, and even blockbuster films, young students from elementary school to university envision the classic dinosaur in a pose that is strikingly similar to the reconstruction paleontologist William Diller Matthew drew over a century ago.

Good luck with your endeavours however.

[suspsy]

I would argue that the public is slowly coming around to the idea of feathered dinosaurs. Popular kids' shows like Dinosaur Train and Dino Dan have shown feathered dinosaurs, and there was even a recent episode of the Simpsons that had a feathered T. Rex. And there have been movies like WWD 3D and Dinosaur Island, which sadly haven't been as popular as the likes of Jurassic Park. And then, of course, you have all the toy companies we discuss here. Battat, CollectA, Safari, and even Schleich have been doing their part. If REBOR wants to increase its popularity among consumers and the paleontological community, they should seriously consider working on the accuracy of their models and not worry so much about whether or not everyone will accept them.

Frankly, if their Yutyrannus had proper plumage, I'd have probably bought it.

[stargatedalek]

Why knowingly make your models inaccurate and then claim otherwise?  That's just going to further public misconceptions,  if you want to suck up to pop culture so be it,  but please don't pretend to represent the science,  thats simply spreading lies.

[CityRaptor]

Like I said before: Someone willing to pay that much for a Dinosaur figure is also someone who wants an accurate model.

[Patrx]

As for your question about feathers, this diagram could also be useful:

Interestingly, that diagram has seen a few corrections since its original publication:


"Orange: lesser coverts
Dark orange: elongated lesser coverts
Light blue: median coverts
Blue: greater coverts
Dark blue: secondaries
Light brown: median primary coverts (lost in modern birds)
Brown: greater primary coverts
Red: primaries
Green: scapulars (speculative)
Dark green: tertials (speculative)
Alula not present, but you can add it on the first digit."

The author is Elijah Shandsheight, and he has a more in-depth blog post on the subject, including more diagrams, here: http://ktboundary-smnt2000.blogspot.it/2014/02/how-to-properly-restore-winged-arms-of.html

Unfortunately, Dobber, I'm not sure of the answer to your last question regarding the range of motion in dromaeosaur wings.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand: I think a lot of us dinosaur fans feel a certain degree of responsibility for correcting or updating the public interpretation of dinosaurs. I know I do. Perhaps that's why our collective response to products like REBOR's tends toward vitriolic. We're sick to death of our favorite prehistoric animals being seen as monstrous and fantastical.

REBOR's perspective seems to be somewhat different. Thanks to their chiming-in here (which I think is great, thanks guys), it's clear that they're dinosaur fans, too. But, they're also a new business, which is a daunting place to stand. I'm sure that trying to appeal to the lowest common denominator just seems like the safest call right now. I must say, though, that I think they really should avoid making claims of accuracy that aren't reflected in their products. Hopefully, as time goes on, REBOR's dino-fan side will have a chance to even out with their business side, and they'll take the chance on more daring, up-to-date models. I honestly think the sales of such models would be better than one might guess.

Personally, I'd pay through the freakin' nose for a model of, say, Velociraptor that looked like a bird with teeth. Because Velociraptor was a bird with teeth, and that's pretty awesome, bro.

[Dobber]

Thanks Patrx, I appreciate your response about the wings. I also agree with the rest of your response. It is a difficult thing to balance a business with perceptions....or at least perceptions of perceptions by the public.  . I also think REBOR would be very surprised by the sales numbers of more accurately depicted dinosaurs. I would LOVE a Tyrannosaurus that would look like the one depicted in Dinosaur Isalnd.....well....maybe with different colors  . Not to mention more bird like Dromaeosaurs.  Also on the plus side there are plenty of other more "traditional" looking dinosaurs that they could tackle as well like Allosaurs and Carcharodontosaurs, ect. Their upcoming Ceratosaurus is a step in that direction. Ceritopsians, Sauropods, ect would also be able to stay in the traditional look category and they have hinted that a good size Apatosaur may be on the way  . I'm willing to bet, though, that Carnivors are the big sellers, and I hope to see some updated sculpts in the future....like the Rex. I know a lot of you guys are sick of the Rex but I absolutely love them and would love to see some other takes on them.

Chris

[suspsy]

I think Patryx summed it up perfectly.

[Horridus]

We know exactly how Yutyrannus should look like and how Utahraptor should be feathered, we're absolutely agree with the diagram provided by tyrantqueen, however as a company we also need to consider the public acceptance of these dinosaur replicas, therefore please consider the inaccuracy was the result of artistic embellishments.

They're not replicas if you're pandering to people who saw Jurassic Park once - who are also very unlikely to buy a dinosaur figure costing upwards of £30. The people willing to shell out that sort of money care about things like anatomical accuracy and, yes, feathers. Don't be afraid of upsetting an increasingly narrow section of your audience.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

I have mostly stayed out of the discussions regarding these theropods because they are not something I care to collect anyways. Just looking at it from outside the the door, I wonder why even name them...or for that matter call them dinosaurs? Dragaons and other movie style monsters sell quite well, and you would not have the constant accuracy monkey to battle.....it would just seem much simpler to me is all.

[Sim]

I think if it's done well, an accurate reconstruction can be just as appealing as a reconstruction made inaccurate to be appealing, if not more appealing than inaccurate reconstructions.

Feathered dinosaurs can be scary/fearsome/awesome and reconstructed well at the same time.  E.g.:


Sinornithosaurus from Planet Dinosaur


Sinocalliopteryx

I'm not sure why feathered carnivorous coelurosaur reconstructions get likened to chickens, ducks or turkeys by some people when out of extant birds they are more like birds of prey.


Golden eagle

After looking at pictures of golden eagles on Google images, I'm even more surprised that some people think feathers make something less formidable/cool!

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

I think if it's done well, an accurate reconstruction can be just as appealing as a reconstruction made inaccurate to be appealing, if not more appealing than inaccurate reconstructions.

Feathered dinosaurs can be scary/fearsome/awesome and reconstructed well at the same time.  E.g.:


Sinornithosaurus from Planet Dinosaur


Sinocalliopteryx

I'm not sure why feathered carnivorous coelurosaur reconstructions get likened to chickens, ducks or turkeys by some people when out of extant birds they are more like birds of prey.


Golden eagle

After looking at pictures of golden eagles on Google images, I'm even more surprised that some people think feathers make something less formidable/cool!

Because the general public doesn't know this and media outlets prefer titles like this :

T. Rex Related to Chickens
T. rex was 'chicken' -- ancestor, that is
Scary 'chicken' roamed Earth with T. rex

Just go to Google and search for "dinosaur chicken"...there are tons of them.  Mass media is where many people get things and usually in headlines. 

and thus spawn images such as these :



This is why feathered dinosaurs have such a hard time being taken seriously, chickens are popular joke fodder ( Why did the chicken cross the road?) in comedy from a long ways back. So associate them with dinosaurs and dinosaurs become humorous..particularly feathered ones.

[Patrx]

For me, that's part of the problem, though. Why should dinosaurs have to look scary or fearsome? Modern animals, even dangerous ones, invoke a broad range of reactions in humans - not just fear. They can be majestic, cute, comical, etc. Dinosaurs needn't be typecast. They're animals like any other.

[Sim]

For me, that's part of the problem, though. Why should dinosaurs have to look scary or fearsome? Modern animals, even dangerous ones, invoke a broad range of reactions in humans - not just fear. They can be majestic, cute, comical, etc. Dinosaurs needn't be typecast. They're animals like any other.

I completely agree, Patrx.  I think it's good to point out though that feathered dinosaurs can look scary/fearsome just being themselves, like other animals just being themselves, since there are people who have said feathered dinosaurs can't be scary.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

For me, that's part of the problem, though. Why should dinosaurs have to look scary or fearsome? Modern animals, even dangerous ones, invoke a broad range of reactions in humans - not just fear. They can be majestic, cute, comical, etc. Dinosaurs needn't be typecast. They're animals like any other.

The thing is they were ages ago...typecast that is.  They're the original " monster" that's why Hollywood fell in love with them..and so did the audiences.  Changing the popular culture image has been tried...but it hasn't succeeded...and there is always more fuel to throw on that fire because it's popular already..the unpopular concept of them as normal animals just barely grabs a toehold anywhere.  Something needs to be cool, catchy and popular to change public perceptions.  Feathered Dinosaurs need a REALLY good P.R. agency.

[Patrx]

The thing is they were ages ago...typecast that is.  They're the original " monster" that's why Hollywood fell in love with them..and so did the audiences.

I completely agree, Patrx.  I think it's good to point out though that feathered dinosaurs can look scary/fearsome just being themselves, like other animals just being themselves, since there are people who have said feathered dinosaurs can't be scary.

I suppose they do sell better that way, as silly as it is. I shouldn't forget that modern animals face a lot of the same problems and it actually hurts them.

[suspsy]

Anyone who doesn't think feathered dinosaurs can be terrifying should try antagonizing a rooster. Or a Canada goose. See what that gets you.

Also:

[Sim]

I'm surprised the dromaeosaurid raptor prey restraint method of predation doesn't seem to have reached the public much, since it's an impressive and interesting way of hunting very similar to that of birds like eagles and hawks, and involves the wings of dromaeosaurids in hunting (it suggests they flapped them to mantain balance on prey they pinned down and held tightly with their feet, while eating the prey alive).

I shouldn't forget that modern animals face a lot of the same problems and it actually hurts them.

Yes, it's awful.  I've always hated the demonising of animals.